Justin Taylor on Janet Mefferd

Apparently, Justin Taylor of the Gospel Coalition just cannot take the heat of Truth. After deleting many comments from this post, Justin finally laid this out to a commenter named Daryl, which reveals much about Justin’s loyalty to the truth before God [ More to come soon, Lord willing ]  :


I’m not going to have the comments section become a debate on Driscoll/Mefferd.

So let me just say a few things by way of comment.

(1) I thought that Ms. Mefferd acted unprofessionally and that authors should know something about her modus operandi here. First, she has every right to raise the issue, but it should have been done first to Mark or his publisher offline. It’s a violation of the Golden Rule. Second, I don’t know what more Mark could have said. He said that he may have made a mistake and that he would consult with Dr. Jones and fix it if he was wrong. But Ms. Mefferd kept badgering him on the point. Third, she told an untruth (conspiracy theorists notwithstanding) that he hung up on her. Her producer even emailed a breathless report to bloggers trying to make a story out of this. Maybe she has apologized for this but I haven’t seen it.

(2) This is not the first time I’ve observed this behavior from her. I think it is very problematic that she has given a platform to a known slanderer regarding the SGM situation. She also tried to try the case in the court of public opinion and proceeded in an unbiblical way. In other words, this didn’t seem like a one-off situation.

(3) I probably should have kept this opinion to myself, but I still hold it.

(4) I did not defend Mark Driscoll or take a “position” or weigh in regarding the charges.

(5) I have written about plagiarism and I think it’s a sin.

(6) I think it’s somewhat silly and selective when people think that I or others need to weigh in on every new Scandal of the Week—or else suggest that we are hiding something or fearing man or protecting celebrities.

(7) I think the footnote in the Resurgence book citing Jones should be expanded to say that this section is indebted to his work. A simple adjustment. But Tyndale has examined it and determined it is well within industry standards.

(8) The 1 Peter material clearly is without attribution and is wrong. I have no insider knowledge on this, but I doubt Driscoll had anything to do with the writing/publication of it, so charges against him on this score are less than careful or accurate. I do think it needs to be changed, and I doubt it was intentional (though I don’t know).

I hope that helps.”